Internet: Good or bad for professional wrestling?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Crayo, May 5, 2012.

  1. Thread subject sort of sums it up. Post your answers with reasons. It'll be a fun debate.
     
  2. It's a benefit to wrestling as a whole in my opinion. It makes the show more interesting because we can discuss with others on what's going on, discuss latest news and so much more in regards to wrestling as a whole. However, with that being said it does spoil things for ourselves as we know what's going to happen but that's our choices. If we wish to know what's going on we look at the internet, if we don't then we simply don't have to look. The internet pushes the WWE in my opinion as that's the only place where all us dedicated fans with can hang out and discuss wrestling. We push WWE in my opinion so it's better for professional wrestling.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. The internet, the IWC and the smarks push the WWE to put out a better product (or at least try to some of the time.) that is less predictable and to also tighten their security over stories and such to avoid leakage. Which is good for the business as a whole.
     
  4. Was thinking of making my next blog about this lol.

    It obviously costs WWE a lot of money in the sense that it probably loses them a lot of PPV buys. But I think as a whole it is beneficial to the WWE and to the viewer.

    As Saylor and Stopspot state above it is great for a lot of us to be able to discuss wrestling online, and some of us probably wouldn't watch if we couldn't otherwise. So if there was no Internet there would be much less smarks and that would mean they weren't forced into pushing people who deserve to be. So instead of seeing the likes of Ryder, Bryan, Punk and maybe even Brock get pushed we would see a show completely based around Cena, Orton and Sheamus - which it is at this point - but without having to cater to the smark community it would be a lot worse.

    Plus, I got back into wrestling by watching it on Youtube, I reckon there must be other who get back involved with wrestling via Youtube.

    So yes, the Internet is good overall for the company IMO.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. I don't even think Orton is main focus any more. I's basically just Cena, Brock, Ace, Sheamus now.
     
  6. Orton's the face of the OTL paperview. :cena:
     
  7. Orton at the moment reminds me of the Undertaker circa '05. An obvious main eventer but was hardly around the title.
     
  8. And this is the first time he's been the face of a ppv since night of champions if I remember correctly. Randy's main event momentum died quite a bit when Barrett hurt himself and he hasn't gotten back to full speed yet. He is on his way but not there yet.
     
  9. [​IMG]

    Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad, but more times it brings more bad to the product, so I stick to the above picture.:pity:
     
  10. WWE:

    Good- Gives them more media exposure, which means more revenue. Twitter has worked out well for them so far. Not to mention WWE.com gives them more opportunity to sell merch than just at live events.

    Bad- Obviously PPV loss. Secrets and backstage drama get released. Smackdown spoilers decrease potential viewers. Basically piracy and leaks are what hurt them, in one way o another.

    Audience:

    Good- Free tivo, AKA the ability to watch replays of any shows you missed. Information on wrestling schools and promotions if you are interested in making a career in the industry. I mean really, imagine trying to find out about FCW if you didn't live in Florida. :pity:

    Bad- Depending on how you look at it, spoilers. Just a general loss of excitement that would come with surprise returns or plot twists if you watched it traditionally.
     
  11. It's freakin' amazing that fellow with Charlie Sheen avatar can write so good post. Just saying, I hope you get the point.:burns:
     
  12. It has ups and downs, just like previously stated. It helps them sell more merchandise, more people have access to the product, we always have more information, but the downside is that people always learn about leaks and secrets, like returns, for example. I don't think spoilers are such a big problem. I mean, they are (for the WWE) because less people watch the shows due to seeing spoilers, but I don't think spoilers are a bad thing if you are a fan. If you don't want to know about the shows, just don't read the spoilers.
     
  13. Real good quality replies thus far. I'm personally a believer in the "internet makes the WWE better" argument.
     
  14. For the audience, there is no negative aspect at all. We can get together with people online who we would otherwise have no access to without the 'net and discuss a favorite hobby of ours. It's also not a bad thing that we can run illegal streams of PPVs, even if it is technically illegal.

    For the business, it's a double edged sword. It allows them to sell more merchandise and use the internet to promote their shows more. On the other hand, it allows spoilers and such to leak out. Look at the way they chanted Goldberg and Lesnar's names before they made their entrances in 2003 and 2012. It kinda ruined the surprise in a way, which wouldn't have been possible if the internet didn't exist.
     
  15. Yeah I was going to mention the chanting of Lesnar, that was pretty annoying since it ruined the shock value in a sense. But then again, no one knew for sure and every one was still shocked so :S

    I just wish WWE stopped trying to swerve us, as they swerve into a brick fucking wall.
     
  16. two lefts do not make a right.
     
  17. Disagree. Spoilers from dirtsheets are a tough pill to swallow at times. Imagine how amped we all would have been for Brock's return if it was completely out of left field instead of us all sitting in the Raw thread thinking "Oh boy I hope Brock comes out"

    It would have been 10 X as exciting as it was.
     
  18. It does if you do a 270 degree left turn and drive straight ahead.
     
  19. I think it's both good and bad from the perspective of the WWE brass and creative staffs. For fans, I think it's overly beneficial.

    Good (for both): It drives viewer numbers up simply because it gets people involved/interested in the product. It's why politicians saturate the airwaves in the last couple of weeks before an election (at least they do in the US; I don't know what they do in the UK or elsewhere). More ads creates more name recognition creates more interest creates more people engaged and taking part, i.e., watching Raw and Smackdown, means more merchandise sales and PPV buys. This obviously benefits WWE, but it also allows for more people to be brought in that the crowd will react to (Lesnar, Rocky, Jericho, also Maria Menounos (sp?), Snooki, Floyd Mayweather). The smarks may not care about the celebrity involvement, but it brings in more viewers and more money, which allows them to pay the guys we want to see who might not otherwise return because they demand higher pay than the average worker.

    Good (for fans) and bad (for brass/creative, at least to an extent because it creates challenges they don't always know how to respond to): The Internet creates more possibilities for discussion/spoilers/etc. that were not as widespread before it existed. This leads to some interesting things (and sometimes even interesting storylines.....*rim shot*), because it often seems to force guys to maintain the illusion. How many of Punk's/Rock's/Laurinatis'/etc.'s tweets are really the thoughts of Phil Brooks/Dwayne Johnson/errrrr, John Lauriniatis/etc., and how many of those tweets are designed to further a character point or a storyline? Does Zack Ryder act like that all the time or is he "on" when filming the Youtube shows and posting tweets and FB statuses (stati?)? This has led to some neat little points of storylines and some neat little discussions here and elsewhere asking these questions and many others.

    So....uh, yeah. It's both good and bad.

    wk
     
  20. Bad. Mainly because of spoilers. I know you dont have to read them, but its just so tempting. Sometimes you find spoiler without even looking for them. Like you'll be looking up backstage info and it will give away spoilers for future feuds. There have been many occasions where WWE has changed a good plan to a not so good or bad plan due to stuff being leaked on the internet. The availability of WWE online also hurts because it lowers ratings not based on content. Like WWE could see low ratings when (and this is all hypothetical) John Cena is in the main event all the time and want to change it up, so they bring Brock back, but the ratings are still low because people are still watching online. WWE sees this as Brock not drawing, so they go back to pushing Cena where they can pull the same rating and make more money. Altogether WWE is probably getting more viewers, but its not showing due to the high amount of online viewers. If people could not so easily go Youtube the Raw from the night before, they'd have to watch it on tv to be up to date. It lowers the shock value and overall entertainment of the show when people know whats going to happen before it does. I marked for Lesnar returning even with the spoilers pretty much assuring he would be coming back. Imagine if I had not even known Brock was negotiating with WWE and he returned. I probably would of shit my pants. I think its all around bad for business